NASA has since terminated one of the originally selected instruments, a magnetometer called ICEMAG, and plans to replace it with a less complex facility magnetometer. However, several other instruments have also suffered significant cost increases and are at risk of “de-scope reviews” that could alter their designs or remove them entirely.
A second issue is a workforce shortage issue at JPL, where several other missions are competing with Europa Clipper for personnel. The OIG report states that Europa Clipper was understaffed by 42 full-time equivalent positions as of October 2018, a shortfall that grew to 67 by December.Barry Goldstein, project manager for Europa Clipper at JPL, said at a March meeting of the Space Studies Board’s Committee on Astrobiology and Planetary Science that workforce availability was a key reason the mission’s target launch date recently slipped by a year to 2023. “It was pretty clear to me that we were not going to make it,” he said. “We had just too many shortfalls in our workforce.”
While only SLS can send Europa Clipper on a direct trajectory to Jupiter, saving several years of travel time, NASA argued in its fiscal year 2020 budget request that using a commercial vehicle could save more than $700 million.The OIG report found a much small cost savings by switching vehicles. NASA estimates that using an SLS will cost $876 million for Europa Clipper, versus $450 million for either Delta 4 Heavy or Falcon Heavy. When savings in mission operations created by the shorter travel time are factored in, using the SLS costs less than $300 million more than either commercial alternative.
However, the report concludes it’s too late to produce an SLS in time for a 2023 launch. NASA estimates it needs 52 months to produce a core stage for the SLS, the long-lead item for the vehicle, and six months for launch integration. “NASA would have had to order the third Core Stage in September 2018 to make a July 2023 launch window,” the report states. “As of March 2019, NASA had not ordered a third Core Stage.”
The report comes ahead of a milestone called Key Decision Point C, expected this summer, when NASA will set a formal cost and schedule estimate for the mission through a process known as joint confidence level (JCL) analysis. A similar analysis performed last October by the mission’s standing review board, according to OIG report, “determined a very low probability for a 2022 launch and provided a 70 percent confidence level for a 2024 launch at a mission cost between $3.5 billion to $4 billion.” That cost, the report noted, is far higher than earlier projections, which pegged the mission at around $2 billion, and approaches the original cost estimate for a Europa mission in the 2011 planetary science decadal that the report considered too expensive for NASA to pursue.
Another vehicle that could take Europa Clipper to Jupiter’s moon is SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy—though it would do so with an asterisk attached. Falcon Heavy has already achieved three successful launches, but using the SpaceX rocket—which is less powerful than the SLS—would add at least three years of travel time to the planned two-year mission. And while using SpaceX’s rocket would save hundreds of millions of dollars on launch costs, it could add to Europa Clipper’s operations budget because of its longer cruise time to Jupiter. “It’s vital that the [Europa] Clipper be launched on the SLS,” Culberson says.
Isn't there a direct window to Jupiter once a year? If they miss 2023, do they have to wait till 2025 or can they launch in 2024?
Interesting clip from that articleQuoteAnother vehicle that could take Europa Clipper to Jupiter’s moon is SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy—though it would do so with an asterisk attached. Falcon Heavy has already achieved three successful launches, but using the SpaceX rocket—which is less powerful than the SLS—would add at least three years of travel time to the planned two-year mission. And while using SpaceX’s rocket would save hundreds of millions of dollars on launch costs, it could add to Europa Clipper’s operations budget because of its longer cruise time to Jupiter. “It’s vital that the [Europa] Clipper be launched on the SLS,” Culberson says.Since the FH payload to GTO is much higher than D-IVH's, it looks like SLS (and whatever delay that brings) is the only choice for a direct launch.Isn't there a direct window to Jupiter once a year? If they miss 2023, do they have to wait till 2025 or can they launch in 2024?
Quote from: Norm38 on 08/20/2019 02:26 pmInteresting clip from that articleQuoteAnother vehicle that could take Europa Clipper to Jupiter’s moon is SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy—though it would do so with an asterisk attached. Falcon Heavy has already achieved three successful launches, but using the SpaceX rocket—which is less powerful than the SLS—would add at least three years of travel time to the planned two-year mission. And while using SpaceX’s rocket would save hundreds of millions of dollars on launch costs, it could add to Europa Clipper’s operations budget because of its longer cruise time to Jupiter. “It’s vital that the [Europa] Clipper be launched on the SLS,” Culberson says.Since the FH payload to GTO is much higher than D-IVH's, it looks like SLS (and whatever delay that brings) is the only choice for a direct launch.Isn't there a direct window to Jupiter once a year? If they miss 2023, do they have to wait till 2025 or can they launch in 2024?I was actually confused by that paragraph in the article as I distinctly remember it being posted in this thread that a study had been conducted by NASA to combine a FH with a STAR ‘upper stage’ to allow a more direct flight.
It helps that JPL found a way to launch on the Falcon Heavy with a Star 48 booster that allows the mission to avoid the Venus flyby (or maybe it was two). If I remember presentations from a few years back, that makes the journey ~5 years vs ~7 with the Venus flybys vs ~2 for a direct launch via SLS.I agree with Casey that the worry over availability of the SLS, and the fact that Clipper might be the second launch, probably scares the hell out of them. The scars of Galileo's tortured path to launch are still fresh.
Quote from: Star One on 08/20/2019 03:14 pmQuote from: Norm38 on 08/20/2019 02:26 pmInteresting clip from that articleQuoteAnother vehicle that could take Europa Clipper to Jupiter’s moon is SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy—though it would do so with an asterisk attached. Falcon Heavy has already achieved three successful launches, but using the SpaceX rocket—which is less powerful than the SLS—would add at least three years of travel time to the planned two-year mission. And while using SpaceX’s rocket would save hundreds of millions of dollars on launch costs, it could add to Europa Clipper’s operations budget because of its longer cruise time to Jupiter. “It’s vital that the [Europa] Clipper be launched on the SLS,” Culberson says.Since the FH payload to GTO is much higher than D-IVH's, it looks like SLS (and whatever delay that brings) is the only choice for a direct launch.Isn't there a direct window to Jupiter once a year? If they miss 2023, do they have to wait till 2025 or can they launch in 2024?I was actually confused by that paragraph in the article as I distinctly remember it being posted in this thread that a study had been conducted by NASA to combine a FH with a STAR ‘upper stage’ to allow a more direct flight.This post?Quote from: vjkane on 03/12/2019 10:47 pmIt helps that JPL found a way to launch on the Falcon Heavy with a Star 48 booster that allows the mission to avoid the Venus flyby (or maybe it was two). If I remember presentations from a few years back, that makes the journey ~5 years vs ~7 with the Venus flybys vs ~2 for a direct launch via SLS.I agree with Casey that the worry over availability of the SLS, and the fact that Clipper might be the second launch, probably scares the hell out of them. The scars of Galileo's tortured path to launch are still fresh.Seems consistent with said paragraph.Quote from: Norm38 on 08/20/2019 02:26 pmIsn't there a direct window to Jupiter once a year? If they miss 2023, do they have to wait till 2025 or can they launch in 2024?The synodic period for Jupiter is 399 days.
One of those concerned NASA's workforce that specializes in building these complex, interplanetary missions. "Clipper has had to compete with at least four other major JPL-managed projects for critical personnel resources, causing concern that the project may not have a sufficient workforce with the required skills at critical periods in its development cycle," the report found. This understaffing issue has largely been resolved, a NASA source told Ars.
The announcement didn’t include a cost estimate for the mission, but agency spokesperson Alana Johnson said Aug. 21 that the agency baseline commitment for the mission is $4.25 billion, covering all costs for the entire mission.
A note re: Europa Clipper's mass vs. other interplanetary probes:After a quick fact check on Gunter's site, Europa Clipper is designed to mass 6001 kg.That's more massive than any other interplanetary probe, save Mars '96 = 6180 kg.
ConclusionNASA’s renewed focus on returning humans to the Moon on an accelerated timetable means that an SLS will not be available to launch the Clipper mission to Europa before 2025 at the earliest.Given all of the foregoing factors, we urge Congress to consider removing the requirement that NASA launch the Europa Clipper on an SLS and allow the Agency to decide whether to use an SLS or a commercial vehicle based on cost, schedule, vehicle availability, and impact on science requirements.
In a section discussing the Clipper mission, Vought's letter includes a cost estimate to build and fly a single SLS rocket in a given year—more than $2 billion—which NASA has not previously specified...."At an estimated cost of over $2 billion per launch for the SLS once development is complete, the use of a commercial launch vehicle would provide over $1.5 billion in cost savings. The Administration urges the Congress to provide NASA the flexibility called for by the NASA Inspector General."
In a Feb. 3 presentation at a meeting of the Outer Planets Assessment Group in Houston, Jan Chodas, project manager for Europa Clipper at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said she was looking for ways to restore cost reserves that had declined precipitously in the last year.<snip>By November [2019], though, [cost] reserves had fallen to just 12%, a level deemed “unacceptably low” for a mission not scheduled for launch until at least 2023.<snip>A project status meeting is scheduled for early March with Thomas Zurbuchen, NASA associate administrator for science.<snip>The goal is to restore those reserves to 20% by the time the project completes its critical design review, currently scheduled for August, which would comply with JPL guidelines.<snip>A provision in a NASA authorization bill introduced in the House Jan. 24 would allow NASA to make the final decision on a launch vehicle for Europa Clipper after carrying out an assessment that considers the various cost and schedule issues associated with using SLS and alternative vehicles. The study would also have to examine if an increased SLS production rate, sought in another section of the bill, could free up the vehicle for use launching Europa Clipper.
Does it work that if you reduce the launch cost, that counts towards the cost reserves?
